Slashdot Mirror
Canadian Newspaper Charging $150 License Fee To Publish Excerpts
dakohli writes "Michael Geist has pointed out an interesting development at the National Post's website. 'If you try to highlight the text to cut and paste it, you are presented with a pop-up request to purchase a license if you plan to post the article to a website, intranet or a blog. The fee would be $150.' He notes that even if you are highlighting a 3rd party quote inside an article a pop-up asking if you want a license will appear. Mr Geist points out this might be contrary to Canadian Copyright Law's fair use provisions."
Not only did NoScript completely defeat this system, but it actually revealed which company they hired to create it:
http://info.icopyright.com/
Palm trees and 8
Or you can add "license.icopyright.net/rights/" to your adblock filter list and never see the stupid overlay ever again.
It is already firmly established in USA law that ineffectual DRM measures (such as pdf passwords) that can be trivially bypassed by methods such as using software that does not actively support the measure do not qualify as anticircumvention measures under the DMCA. Accessing a Web page which is "protected" only by JS and so can be accessed by Lynx or Firefox with NoScript does not violate the DMCA. Saying "Please don't copy this" is not DRM.
> And it can be argued that you accepted the license by
> accessing the site and copying the data. Don't like the
> license?
To bind me to a contract you must show me the contract and condition my receipt of the document on my acceptance of the license.
> Read, but you may not copy.
Fair use does not require the copyright owner's permission.
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.